Print 90 comment(s) - last by Oregonian2.. on Oct 18 at 2:23 PM

The Eee PC will be priced at $199 for bulk customers; retail prices start at $299

Ultra Mobile PCs (UMPCs) should be nothing new to readers of this site. Over the past year, DailyTech detailed the Samsung Q1 along with Sony's Vaio UX series -- more recently, we've seen new offerings in the form of the Samsung Q1 Ultra and Fujitsu LifeBook U810.

While the UMPC platform has sparked some interest from consumers, the high price of entry -- around $1,000 for entry-level models -- has stalled significant growth of the sector. Asustek hopes to change that with its new Eee PC.

According to Reuters, the Eee PC will be priced from $199 for its bulk customers. Asustek's Eee PC will be available at brick-and-mortar stores like Best Buy and online retailers like Newegg within the next few weeks. The UMPC will later make an appearance in Europe.

"If we can sell a couple million [Eee PCs], we'll be confident," remarked Jonathan Tsang, Asustek's president of sales and marketing.

The Eee PC features a 7" display (800x480), 10/100 NIC, 56k modem, WiFi, 256MB to 1GB of DDR2 memory and solid-state memory for storage (2GB to 8GB). To keep prices low, the device runs a Linux-based operating system although it is compatible with Windows XP.

The range-topping Eee PC 8G features 1GB of memory and 8GB of storage space. It also features a 5200 mAh battery good for 3.5 hours of battery life (lesser models are stuck with a 4400 mAh battery good for 2.8 hours). Device weight is a trim 2 pounds.

A Russian review of the Eee PC revealed that the device is powered by an ULV 900MHz Intel Celeron processor which is backed up by an Intel 910GMLE Express chipset.

Updated 10/16/2007
Asus has released official specifications for its Eee PC and this article has been updated to reflect the additional information. According to Gizmodo, the Eee PC will retail from $299 USD.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

My thoughts on uses.
By Mitch101 on 10/15/2007 9:45:10 AM , Rating: 5
1> Kids PC.
2> CAR PC, CAR GPS - Possibly connect an dashboard mounted screen and a usb hard drive.
3> House remote control or TV remote control.
4> Kitchen - Recipe system, Message center.
5> Robotics projects.
6> DIVX!!!
7> Retro Arcade gaming. (Not just Pac-Man) There is enough power in this thing to be a pre-nintendo 64 emulator system. I would be you could get Sega Geneisis emulators and Super NES to run on the unit making it a portable gaming machine the kids would enjoy.

The list goes on and on but there is a lot of potential for a cheap pc like this.

I suspect it wont have GPU power but consider the specs of the X-Box 1 only has a 733mhz cpu and 64 megs of ram and plays Far Cry.

This will put ASUS on the map! Your average person doesnt know who ASUS is but they will when this is launched.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By dajeepster on 10/15/2007 9:56:54 AM , Rating: 2
yeah... this would make a great carputer... or in my case.. a Jeeputer :D

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By iFX on 10/15/2007 10:00:10 AM , Rating: 2
... I have been buying Asus products for years and love them! You're right, the average person doesn't know about Asus! People ask me what kind of PC I have and I say "Asus" and they say "Huh?".

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Mitch101 on 10/15/2007 10:03:42 AM , Rating: 2
It uses an Intel 910GMLE Express Chipset. It doesnt specify what version of Direct X but the specs are fair. Keep in mind it only has to do resolutions in 800x480. I kind of wish they approached ATI or NVIDIA for an older graphics chip that could have been die shrunk instead of the Intel one but it doesnt look too horrible.

OpenGL for Linux OpenGL on supported 2.6 kernel Linux distributions for advanced 3D graphics acceleration on dual independent displays

OpenGL 1.4 supported on the Mobile Intel 945GME Express Chipset, Intel 945G Express Chipset, Mobile Intel 915GME Express Chipset, Intel 915GV Express Chipset, and Mobile Intel 910GMLE Express Chipset

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Chris Peredun on 10/15/2007 10:20:00 AM , Rating: 1
It uses an Intel 910GMLE Express Chipset ... it doesnt look too horrible.

You've never tried using an Intel GPU for gaming, have you?

Don't count on anything newer than Quake III, and even that's going to need a detail reduction.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By omnicronx on 10/15/2007 10:28:43 AM , Rating: 2
pfft, i doubt it will be able to handle quake 3. You might be able to play the original half-life if you are lucky. You really can't compare the specs of a console to a PC directly, they function in different ways and consoles don't have the extra OS layer hogging all of the resources.(well they do but its very low level).

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Mitch101 on 10/15/2007 10:33:22 AM , Rating: 2
I tto seriously doubt quake 3.

Quake 1 and 2 at 640x480 should be possible though.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Chris Peredun on 10/15/2007 11:05:05 AM , Rating: 2
Let's not forget our history, shall we?

Quake 3 was launched in December of 1999. Back then, the "fastest GPU in the market" was the geForce DDR. The original geForce. (Early adopters, please raise your hands if you bought the SDR one. Exit is on your left.)

While the GMA900 is pathetic by today's standards, it can certainly hold up to those of days gone by. I'm quite confident that it can handle Quake 3 at native resolution with moderate details.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Mitch101 on 10/15/2007 11:22:56 AM , Rating: 2
God is it that old? You might be right then. That would be a treat.

One thing that could be insteresting is that the Half-Life 2 engine is DX7 compatible. Would be interesting to see if the engine scales back that far to be playable. If not oh well I can put the x-box in the mini-van.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By FrankM on 10/15/2007 4:13:38 PM , Rating: 2
No, even the 945GM's GMA950 is not quite enough for HL2/CSS. Especially with the rest of the specs. For example, I can't get CSS to playable levels on GMA950, Yonah-core CelM410 1.46G and 512MB of RAM: the video stress test gives 48FPS, but ingame with even a single bot gets 4-5...

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Mitch101 on 10/15/2007 4:20:32 PM , Rating: 2
Could we force the DirectX version spec for the game engine to use since its supposed to be backwards compatible?

Since the engine is DX7 compatible could we force the game to use DX7 extension even thought the chipset I assume is DX9 capable?

Ah. Will just wait till it arrives to see what it can do.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By goku on 10/16/2007 11:36:26 AM , Rating: 2
The HL2 engine supports DX6 as well so forcing it into DX6 mode may very well make it playable on Integrated graphics by intel.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By mindless1 on 10/16/2007 5:06:30 AM , Rating: 1
It's more than a little premature to assume that, as it is not very demanding to run DX7 games at 640x480 with all the eyecandy turned off.

Were you running at 640x480?

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By glitchc on 10/16/2007 9:29:50 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds to me like the limiting factor there is your CPU, not the GMA 950.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By mino on 10/16/2007 4:32:16 PM , Rating: 2
The GMA lacks Vertex Shaders so they have to be done by CPU (with horrible efficiency).

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By mikeyD95125 on 10/17/2007 12:01:48 AM , Rating: 2
Totally depends on your res and settings. Is this at 1280x1024?

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Haltech on 10/15/2007 5:19:14 PM , Rating: 2
my GMA900 can play Age of Empires 3, granted everything turned off.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By AndreasM on 10/16/2007 9:40:06 AM , Rating: 2
I seriously doubt Quake 1 and 2.

Pong at 1x1 should be possible though.


RE: My thoughts on uses.
By frobizzle on 10/16/2007 10:45:10 AM , Rating: 2
You might be able to play the original half-life if you are lucky.

Actually, that should run great. The original Half-Life was noteworthy in that it could run acceptably on virtually any hardware. It simply scaled things back visually but playability was fine.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By glitchc on 10/16/2007 9:27:34 AM , Rating: 2
The GMA 900 on my Acer laptop handles Quake 3 just fine. Full detail and everything at ~60 fps with vsync enabled. Intel chips aren't THAT bad. Granted they can't run Bioshock, but then neither could my X850XT, which I think is still a very decent pixel pusher.

Upgraded to an 8800 GTS recently though :D Bioshock runs just fine now.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By jak3676 on 10/15/2007 10:38:30 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. If they could have gotten an old ATI 200m or something similar that would have been great.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Chris Peredun on 10/15/2007 10:03:42 AM , Rating: 2
I suspect it wont have GPU power but consider the specs of the X-Box 1 only has a 733mhz cpu and 64 megs of ram and plays Far Cry.

The Xbox also has the "geForce 3.5" NV2A, which is a fair step above an Intel GMA900.

However, as a previous poster suggests - it'll definitely play Doom. :)

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By plewis00 on 10/15/2007 11:00:47 AM , Rating: 2
You might slate it but the GMA900 and 950 series are quite powerful for low-end graphics and probably are more powerful than a GeForce 3-era GPU when coupled with a decent CPU (because the Intel graphics offload shader calculations to the CPU). I used to think they were weak until I actually tried running games on them and was pleasantly surprised. Obviously try and load it with the latest and greatest games and it will fall over, but even more recent ones with the settings down it will cope with.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Oscarine on 10/15/2007 1:53:08 PM , Rating: 2
With a modern cpu compared to the cpu's in the era of GeForce 3 than yeah, but apples to apples a GeForce 3 Ti500 would outperform a GMA900 or 950 but not a X3100

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By Flunk on 10/15/2007 10:18:57 PM , Rating: 2
No, the Geforce 3 is still better in raw number crunching power although it lackes modern features. The X3100 is complete garbage, the shaders are offloaded to the CPU. Don't argue, I have one. It designed to (barely) run Vista Aero and that is all.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By therealnickdanger on 10/18/2007 10:56:47 AM , Rating: 2
Check this out, on the last page you can see a X3100 playing UT3:

Granted, it probably only gets as high as 15fps, but the final game combined with a newer driver might get it higher...

I have a mobo with an X3000 on it (althought I primarily use the 7950GT) and it is not THAT bad. Nearly every game is playable with the latest driver and some tweaking.

I ran my X3000 through the paces with my older E6300 and it was able to play Halo, Half-Life 2, UT2K4, and Far Cry over 20fps consistently - sometimes a lot higher. I mean, you're dealing with bare-minimum quality settings, but at 480p, you don't really notice.

This is all beside the point though, this unit comes with a 950-series chip, which is typically worse than the X3000. I'll wait to pass judgement until I see the highest-end offering with XP tested.

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By murphyslabrat on 10/15/2007 11:32:38 AM , Rating: 2
7> Retro Arcade gaming. (Not just Pac-Man) There is enough power in this thing to be a pre-nintendo 64 emulator system.

I don't know for sure, but we played n64 games on Project 64, with a 16MB Vanta LT and a 600Mhz Pentium III at about 70% speed. This was with 256MB of PC-133, ?though RAM quantity should not matter.? With the performance optimizations of the Conroe-derived architectures, a 900MHz CPU aught to be comparable to at least a 1.266GHz PIII-S(I have one in an 815e board with 512MB of PC-133 RAM, and intend to try Project64 with Zelda: Majora's Mask/Super Smash Brothers/Starfox 64. I will give an update detailing performance, if anyone is interested)

RE: My thoughts on uses.
By murphyslabrat on 10/16/2007 6:23:06 PM , Rating: 2
Whoops, it's a Pentium-M based cpu. It would still be better than a Pentium III in general, but FP operations are roughly equal (though slightly better on the Pentium-M's)

Interesting indeed.
By Master Kenobi on 10/15/2007 8:44:27 AM , Rating: 2
This would be a good "My first laptop" for the kids, just wipe it and load a copy of good ole Win2K and your set.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By Moishe on 10/15/2007 8:54:48 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, win2k would run great on one of these. Depending on what they give you though, the installed OS could be quite nice.

It's about time there was a $200 laptop.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By wordsworm on 10/15/2007 9:07:17 AM , Rating: 2
Kids? I want one too! Looks great for throwing it in your bag without worrying too much about the harddrive getting knocked into oblivion. It might very well be my first foray into Linux. It says 'XP compatible', so I'm thinking of reloading Ubuntu Server on it to finally give my ambition of learning the ropes a try. I don't think I'll ever replace Windows altogether, but it'd sure be fun to try! But, as you said, 'for the kids', if you look at their pictures, you can see two kids playing with it: a boy in the driver's seat and the girl smiling as she lets big brother show her how.

The high end one looks good: 1GB ram, 8GB solid state hard drive. That's enough for my basic needs when I'm just looking to do a bit of work in a different setting than the office or at home. Since I use OpenOffice for my spreadsheet and wordprocessor, that's most of what I'd be using it for. Doing work at the pub, getting drunk, dropping the machine. But wait! It's ok! Solid state drive, remember?! Cracked screen? Oh well... get another one. It's only $199! Hail to Asus!

RE: Interesting indeed.
By Anh Huynh on 10/15/2007 10:29:08 AM , Rating: 2
I want one too :(.

It'd be a great notebook to use for notes in class....too bad I'm graduating in March >_<, and I have an iPhone to use as a portable Internet device.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By theapparition on 10/16/2007 8:54:59 AM , Rating: 1
I'm getting a little tired from people reading too much into this article. I'm really not trying to flame, but I am going to burst your bubble.

The high end one looks good: 1GB ram, 8GB solid state hard drive.

Nowhere does it have 1GB ram, its listed as 512MB.

the Eee PC will be priced from $199 for its bulk customers.

Here's the bubble bursting part. It will start from $199. That is for the low end 4GB model, expect the higher end models to cost more. That is also the price that bulk customers will pay. You will certainly pay more. I expect this to actually get into your hands for $299 at launch.

I think this is pretty cool by asus, so I'm not trashing it by any means. I just don't think you'll be able to buy one at $199.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By jtemplin on 10/16/2007 10:08:57 AM , Rating: 2
Um...your not very good at bubble bursting. The article clearly states that the
range-topping Eee PC 8G features 1GB of memory and 8GB of storage space.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By wordsworm on 10/16/2007 10:12:35 AM , Rating: 2
Nowhere does it have 1GB ram, its listed as 512MB.
Insert sarcastic comment here: ..........
256MB to 1GB of DDR2 memory and solid-state memory for storage (2GB to 8GB).
I'd be surprised to find them much over $199 to savvy consumers. But, this is speculation at best. I wouldn't be surprised to see the high end version at around $399-499.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By theapparition on 10/17/2007 7:45:44 AM , Rating: 2
That information was only added after the article was updated at 9:25 before both your and jtemplin's replies. In fact, that ASUS site has it listed starting at 256MB of memory, which was never in the original Daily Tech article. I don't doubt that it can go to 1GB, but it will start at 256MB. And that again is for the base price.

As I originally stated, I guessed that the retail price was going to be $299. Guess what the official starting retail price is........???

If it had the originally stated 512MB ram, 8GB SS storage, all for $199, I would have snapped one up in a heartbeat. As would you and most others here who were excited about this. But I was skeptical, and posted my doubts that you'd be able to actually get that machine, with those specifications, for that price. As it turns out, I was right.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the high end version at around $399-499.

I agree, and because of that, my enthusiasm has completely died. Why pay $499 when you can get a cheapo Dell or HP laptop for similar. And those laptops will far exceed anything this one can do (with exception of battery life).

RE: Interesting indeed.
By murphyslabrat on 10/18/2007 10:57:34 AM , Rating: 2
But it's small! you can fit it in your backpack, and you cannot do that with other brands!


RE: Interesting indeed.
By wordsworm on 10/15/2007 9:09:46 AM , Rating: 2
I have no idea why you got rated down for this post... maybe some Linux fans were offended by your suggestion. btw, did you notice that it's good for XP?

RE: Interesting indeed.
By Master Kenobi on 10/15/2007 6:55:07 PM , Rating: 2
Good for XP yes, but Win2K has lower system footprint and requirements, I was trying to get the most mileage out of the lack of disk space and hardware.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By wordsworm on 10/16/2007 10:17:52 AM , Rating: 2
Good for XP yes, but Win2K has lower system footprint and requirements, I was trying to get the most mileage out of the lack of disk space and hardware.

So... do you mean you won't be trying Vista on it?

RE: Interesting indeed.
By FITCamaro on 10/15/2007 9:13:23 AM , Rating: 2
The question is is it fast enough to say watch movies or TV shows loaded onto it? 800x480 is good enough for standard def rips off DVDs. Of course you're not going to fit a ton of shows on it. But you could say get a few movies or a season of your favorite show on it.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By erwos on 10/15/2007 9:26:20 AM , Rating: 2
Every GPU out there has MPEG2 acceleration. And I was watching DVDs on a Celeron 700mhz way back when _without it_.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By Chris Peredun on 10/15/2007 9:37:52 AM , Rating: 2
MPEG2 is way too large to be used on this device; I think the parent poster is looking more in the realm of downloaded or ripped video in an MPEG4 flavour.

I have a feeling that the CPU in the Eee is the same cacheless Celeron-M 900 that was used in the early ASUS R2H UMPCs, which means that DivX/Xvid performance should be sufficient at near-native resolutions, but it definitely won't be handling any heavy lifting codec-wise.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By FITCamaro on 10/15/2007 1:52:41 PM , Rating: 2
My mom had a 700MHz Celeron laptop. It sucked playing DVDs. Would skip and freeze any time there was a heavy action sequence. Could've been the player but still.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By drew494949 on 10/15/2007 9:39:15 AM , Rating: 2
Good comment... also, Can it play Doom?

[This time the comment was actually called for]


I'd love to turn this into a Portable movie and music player. As long as it has wi-fi built in.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By wrekd on 10/15/2007 10:13:00 AM , Rating: 2
I really really want one of these so I can load Ubuntu.

Remember there is no optical drive so you will need to transfer the movies to it.

It does have plenty of usb slots and an SD slot for added space.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By Gul Westfale on 10/15/2007 10:25:43 AM , Rating: 1
i would love one of these. right now i'm keeping my $1200 laptop at work (we have wireless where i work), but i only use it to watch the occasional simpson's episode or send emails/browse the web while i'm on my lunch break. this little asus thingie could do that as well, and for only 200 bucks i wouldn't worry so much about it being stolen.

however, the text says that the price is $199 for bulk customers
; so there might be a markup for those of us who just buy one or two of these. even at $250 this would still be a great deal though.

RE: Interesting indeed.
By marvdmartian on 10/15/2007 10:42:29 AM , Rating: 2
I can see one of these being perfect not only for the kids, but also for older folks that just want something cheap for e-mail and mild web surfing. Give this to your parents or grandparents, so they can get into ebay too! ;)

Actually, this would be just about perfect for my brother in law. He has absolutely no use for one, but wants a laptop computer, especially once he saw how cool the one his daughter (my niece) got was. Give him one of these, with the capabilities it has, and he'd be happy. :)

RE: Interesting indeed.
By marvdmartian on 10/15/2007 10:49:04 AM , Rating: 2
Since there's no way to edit or add onto our posts.......

The other thing I just thought of was that this would be perfect with some sort of an optical drive on it. Say maybe a dvd-rom? Then give it usb2.0, so you can have an external burner possibility. :)

RE: Interesting indeed.
By Wolfpup on 10/15/2007 3:48:07 PM , Rating: 2
I see this as possibly useful as a sort of PDA. Just something you can access quickly, drag around the house, etc. It's cheap enough that you won't worry too much about hauling it everywhere.

At least someone's finally getting the price right on these things. I assume it might be able to sell for $250-300ish?

USB? Printer Support?
By iFX on 10/15/2007 9:47:30 AM , Rating: 2
I would replace my current notebook with one as these as long as I was able to hook up my USB printer and sync my smart phone with it via Bluetooth or USB.

RE: USB? Printer Support?
By nayy on 10/15/2007 10:26:14 AM , Rating: 2
I frankly don't think you should consider this as your main o even secondary system, although im pretty sure that it can handle both printing and syncing
Many of the guys here, including my self, are excited because its a dirty cheap system that you can give a bunch of cool uses, I bet it will become one of the most have of the users of this site, but you can be sure we all have a couple other systems to handle our more serious computing needs

RE: USB? Printer Support?
By iFX on 10/15/2007 4:01:25 PM , Rating: 2
Well I basically have two computing needs at home which are:

A: Web surfing/bill pay/email-smartphone/wordprocessing/finance.

B: Gaming.

I already have these split between my monster gaming rig and my notebook. If I could replace my aging notebook with one of these for letter A functions that would be swell. The notebook I am currently using for letter A is by all measurements LESS powerful (PII400Mhz) than this new UMPC.

RE: USB? Printer Support?
By spluurfg on 10/16/2007 9:57:37 AM , Rating: 2
Agree with you 100%. This would be THE ideal companion to a blackberry/smartphone for travel where all one needs to do is process email more quickly and conveniently as well as handling small work/attachments (especially in the case of blackberries which cannot really open attachments properly).

I would happily pay a premium if it had bluetooth and a longer battery. IE if it had a 5-8 hour battery, weighed 0.5-1lb more, and had bluetooth.

Some links I've been following
By bernZ on 10/15/2007 1:24:25 PM , Rating: 2
I've been lurking on DT for the longest time, but I just HAD to sign up an account when I see you guys do an article on the E.

$199 USD pricing of the EEE will be a 2gb SSD/256mb RAM/no webcam model which is only available in bulk. The initial shipments of the EEE are likely to be the 'decked out' $359(ish) model which, last I checked (before asus pulled a fast one and put up the 8G version) was the 4GB/512MB/webcam version. They should be arriving in North America in the start of November.

NDAs should be lifted soon.

RE: Some links I've been following
By bernZ on 10/15/2007 1:28:16 PM , Rating: 2

The Eee PC features a 7" display (800x480), 10/100 NIC, 56k modem, WiFi, 512MB of memory and solid-state memory for storage (4GB, 8GB or 16GB). To keep prices low, the device runs a Linux-based operating system.

no 56k model still, and no wifi on base model. 256mb ram for the base model, and definitely no 16gb ssd option available. From the reviews from and the Russian website, there's just a piece of plastic covering the 56k port, suggesting that either

a) there will be a 56k module coming soon, but not now, or

b) they are reusing a chassis from another model and won't actually have a 56k module(like someone said, perhaps the Sony TX series)

RE: Some links I've been following
By fleshconsumed on 10/15/2007 3:51:35 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the better info, I was wondering about "starts at $199" part. I don't care about webcam or 56K, but I do need WiFi, and if the lowest model that has wifi starts at $359, then I'm going to pass because at that price you could buy a budget laptop on sale for just a little more.

RE: Some links I've been following
By bernZ on 10/15/2007 5:05:56 PM , Rating: 2
I believe the model with wifi is actually a step up from the base 2g model. It definitely will NOT be $359 for the most basic+wifi model - try something like 299.

From NCIX (Canada site, but they also have a US site) - the cheapest model they have stocked there is actually 259 and that's with wifi.

Windows is a waste to put on it.
By sc3252 on 10/16/2007 1:46:31 AM , Rating: 2
I keep reading people wanting to put windows 2000 and windows xp. Why? You wont be able to run any of your applications, and right off the bat you will lose almost half its hard drive. Your best bet is to stick with Linux and install Zsnes if you want games. All the applications you will need will already be included, so there is no point of loading windows 2000, unless you like playing quake 3, but you can already run that in Linux, or half life, but you can still already run that in Linux.

If this was some high spec computer with 2GB of ram and a 2Ghz cpu with a actual gpu. Then I can see someone putting windows 2000/xp and have an actual reason. At the current spec's there is no real reason to install windows on it, and would only hurt what you could do with it, and what it was designed for.

RE: Windows is a waste to put on it.
By mindless1 on 10/16/2007 5:23:10 AM , Rating: 2
Win2k with unnecessary services turned off consumes less than 60MB memory and after cleaning up the HDD, less than 512MB HDD space.

However, games tend to hog HDD space too, and it was a crazy start for so many to start thinking "oh let's take a laptop that costs less than a good video card and try to do the most demanding thing done on most PCs these days, make it run hotter and shorten the battery life by throwing a GPU in there, THEN we can complain it's only 640x480".

Kids, this is not your next gaming system, and they should not have tried to make it one, nor should they try to make "everything" capable of gaming. Some people really want devices that can't game, becaues they don't have the power hungry GPU and higher heat levels and extra cost.

I don't know about you but one of the things I enjoy about gaming is playing them on larger LCDs. Game on a 640x480 screen? I'd rather carry a full sized laptop if gaming were that important.

As for leaving it running Linux, sure that is a great idea for many people, but of course some will want Windows compatibility for some things.

It's crazy to think Win2k or XP "needs" 2GB of ram and 2GHz CPU. We could also say "oh but Linux would run a lot better with that too". Even WinXp installs to a 128MB memory footprint before all the 3rd party stuff is installed, and while much of the 3rd party stuff isn't needed, if any is that is a reason why it's running Windows.

I agree that given certain apps there is no point to windows. Nobody should be rushing to change it until they've decided for themselves, but besides raising the total cost by maybe 40% for the windows license, there isn't really all that much of a penalty for running windows barebone instead of trying to put everything and the kitchen 'sink on the system, which you can't really do with Linux either although I conceded for what you could do, you can take up less memory and HDD space, but then again using older versions of windows apps the same could be said. Does one "really" need Office 2K7? Office 97 can take up less than 150MB of HDD space, for example, even less if only the required apps are installed.

RE: Windows is a waste to put on it.
By sc3252 on 10/16/2007 3:30:54 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't trying to make the point that windows 2000/xp need 2GB of ram or any of that nonsense. I was trying to say that you probably wont get anything out of it by changing it, since any application that you will be using will feel unbearably slow on it.

If office 97 was all you were going to run that still doesnt make much sense to change over just for that alone. I know that was just an example, but I have read people claiming they were going to do all these great things on it, if it had windows. I would like to see someone put photoshop on it and try and edit some photo's, since it would be pretty pointless because of the screen size.

By Oregonian2 on 10/18/2007 2:23:23 PM , Rating: 2
If Office type tools are what you want (and you've already got the license that allows a secondary installation on a laptop)? Are the dual-direction file compatible linux tools that it comes with (?) nice and much speedier?

P.S. - There are windows apps other than Photoshop. Even photo manipulation ones other than photoshop that are much lighter weight.

P.P.S. - OS/2 is "out", no floppy drive to format floppies with (inside joke)!

Like a Sony
By plewis00 on 10/15/2007 10:13:37 AM , Rating: 2
Does anyone else see the similarity between this and the Sony VAIO TX series? You know, the thin carbon-fibre ones - the power button is in the same location, the hinge-style is the same, the location of the ports appears to be the same place as well. The main differences being the plastic exterior (vs. carbon-fibre) and smaller screen.

RE: Like a Sony
By fleshconsumed on 10/15/2007 11:12:33 AM , Rating: 2
Asus is one of the OEM suppliers of sony laptops so it's not really surprising.

RE: Like a Sony
By Oscarine on 10/15/2007 1:54:49 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe visually similar but not functionally.

Of course they shouldn't be considered the 1800$ price disparity.

By Chris Peredun on 10/15/2007 12:49:48 PM , Rating: 2
The site seems a little ambiguous with regard to the processor. It gets referred to first as a 900MHz Celeron with 256KB of L2, then as the Celeron 353 with 512KB of L2 - but the sample is shown as having an 800MHz Celeron with no L2 cache at all.

I really hope this is using the 353 as stated, because a lack of L2 cache would really, really hurt the Eee's performance.

By ajfink on 10/15/2007 12:53:50 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed. I'm hoping that the 900/8/400 CPU they've got in that photo is only for the test machine that they have there. A modern processor without any L2? I'd really rather not.

I'd also like to see this article updated with native-English reviews when they become available.

By micksh on 10/15/2007 8:02:57 PM , Rating: 2
They say they got an engineering sample with specs different from production model and manufacturer claims that real notebooks will have Celeron 353.

Battery Life and USB-powered devices
By ninjit on 10/15/2007 3:05:55 PM , Rating: 2
After seeing this, and looking up more specs (it has 3 USB 2.0) ports, I started wondering what battery life was like on laptops in general when reading a USB-powered external drive.

A lot of the comments here have been pondering it's uses as a portable media player, storage space being the biggest concern, but you can now get USB-bus powered drives upto 250GB that would solve that, and would be the perfect companion for this.

But, if you are on a plane watching DIVX/H.264 movies the whole flight off of your drive, how long would the battery last?

By ofacto on 10/15/2007 10:47:24 PM , Rating: 2
Early previews of the eee show that battery life was 3.5 to 4 hours for normal use. I believe that Asus has actually upped the battery capacity since than.

By jak3676 on 10/16/2007 12:30:21 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't want to try to power a portable drive with this thing for long. There are some really low powered 1.8" drives out there (think iPod), but I would guess that running a standard 2.5" portable HD would cut battery life by 30-60 minutes. You'd be better off getting an extra 8GB thumbdrive, or just plugging it in occanionaly and transfering the files you need to its internal flash.

about the updated info
By Screwballl on 10/16/2007 10:04:46 AM , Rating: 2
question.... 900MHz Celeron and using DDR2? since when did budget Netburst architecture include the capability to use a Pentium3 with DDR2? Unless it is a downclocked LGA775 Celeron which means we may be able to get some overclocking out of it... will be interesting to see what the possibilities are.

RE: about the updated info
By Visual on 10/16/2007 12:25:42 PM , Rating: 2
775 is used on the desktop for a long while now, but this is probably socket M or even more likely the older socket 479 version.
the chipset itself is old and so the cpu is unlikely to be a new "core" celeron... a low-clocked pentium-m celeron most likely. hardly a pentium 3.

RE: about the updated info
By johnsonx on 10/16/2007 5:27:40 PM , Rating: 2
It's a ULV (Ultra Low Voltage) chip. They do run at speeds around 1Ghz. You probably won't be able to OC it much, as there won't be any way to increase vcore.

By pnyffeler on 10/15/2007 1:07:19 PM , Rating: 2
I'm thinking about getting this for traveling or when I'm sitting on my couch to surf the web. However, do you think this thing could handle the Cisco VPN client? I'm a little concerned that it will be tough to install, depending upon how dumbed-down the interface is and how much access a person would have to the Linux underneath it.

I'm also not going to install XP for sure. It would cost almost as much to buy a licensed copy of XP as it would for the whole laptop!

By UNHchabo on 10/15/2007 3:47:46 PM , Rating: 2
You could always load the distro of your choice on there... Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, etc.

Eee + Windows: Screen, Storage Issues
By abakshi on 10/15/2007 3:53:12 PM , Rating: 2
I'd imagine the screen would be a major issue while running something like Win 2K/XP, if you look at it from a mini-laptop point of view.

It's tiny (7") and low-res (800x480). I realize this is what some UMPCs use, but it's a problem because many programs' dialog boxes are too large vertically, and without the ability to scroll up and down, it's hard to see the full windows.

I know this because I have a Sony C1VN PictureBook (Crusoe 600 MHz, 9" ultrawidescreen - 1024x480, ATI Mobility M1 8MB) with a 100GB 5400 rpm drive, running XP Pro. It actually runs pretty decently (even plays full DivX movies on battery power), but I can't imagine what I'd do on the machine with only 4 or 8 gb of space...

By shabby on 10/15/2007 6:01:11 PM , Rating: 2
Win2k would easily fit into 4gb of ram with plenty to spare, or xplite. I've seen some xp lite builds that are 400megs installed.

The 7" screen is definetly a downside, i hope you could setup a virtual screen at higher res and then just move the mouse over if the dialog box doesnt fit.

By Omega215D on 10/15/2007 10:13:45 PM , Rating: 2
If Newegg can keep this system to around $200 - $300 (Asus said bulk customers but this didn't stop Newegg from selling single CPUs at the bulk prices) Then this is basically a better deal than my Palm T|X.

RE: Newegg
By elpresidente2075 on 10/16/2007 3:10:36 AM , Rating: 2
$100 better than my Axim x30 as well.

OLED = More battery life
By elpresidente2075 on 10/16/2007 3:07:08 AM , Rating: 2
I basically have my newegg card out right now to buy one of these, but being very slightly out of my price range (for immediate repayment), I do have some objection.

Now, if it came with a 10" widescreen OLED display at the same price point, I'd ignore any caveats I had and would buy it without a second thought. I predict a max of two years before this happens.

As for me, I predict I'll have one of these before the end of the year...

RE: OLED = More battery life
By kileil on 10/16/2007 10:32:56 AM , Rating: 2
They're scheduled to come out with a 10" screen version by spring of 2008. From what I've been able to find online, it will up the price around $100 and come with slightly higher specs.

Redesign of Asus Ultra Mobile PC
By Anosh on 10/16/2007 9:46:41 AM , Rating: 2
The specs are very similar to one of Asus already existing products:

RE: Redesign of Asus Ultra Mobile PC
By bernZ on 10/16/2007 4:01:58 PM , Rating: 2
Hardly a 'redesign' of the UMPC. The UMPC uses Windows Tablet edition, EEE uses Linux Xandros.

Besides, the UMPC costs well over 1000. EEE costs... 300, maybe 400 for the top model? :P

By UBB on 10/16/2007 4:55:58 PM , Rating: 2
Does the Eee come with a internal CD-ROM?

By shabby on 10/16/2007 6:27:09 PM , Rating: 2

Got me interested until MID's came along
By pugster on 10/15/2007 1:19:43 PM , Rating: 1
The processor are 90nm dolthan core. The mid's are 45nm penryn cores. After seeing some of the concept models of the MID's, they definately looks sexier than the asus eee pc's. Can't wait to get one of those.

By Anosh on 10/15/2007 2:25:24 PM , Rating: 2

Pricing info
By ofacto on 10/15/2007 10:44:07 PM , Rating: 2
The $199 pricing was was only for contract orders, the $199 model is pretty stripped down and will not be sold in retail chains. There is a rumor that Asus has an order of 1 million units of these made by the Russian Government to be used in educational institutions.

The ones that will be sold at Newegg and other retailers will probably retail from $299-399.

*chop chop chop*
By shabby on 10/16/2007 6:30:06 PM , Rating: 2
I could of swore the base model would have 512mb of ram and 4gb of hd space. Now those specs were cut in half.
In fact there were a bunch of pre-orders in certain stores couple weeks ago for those exact specs, think everyone will be cancelling their orders... i know i would.

"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis
Related Articles
ASUS Prepares Eee PC Shipments
August 21, 2007, 2:09 PM
Fujitsu Announces $999 LifeBook U810 UMPC
August 14, 2007, 10:22 AM
Sony Announces $1,800 VAIO UX UMPC
May 16, 2006, 3:51 AM
Microsoft Unveils its "Origami" Project
March 9, 2006, 10:00 AM

Most Popular ArticlesFree Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM
Top 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki